Not all stress is the same. Brutal assault is considered a "stressor" from the perspective of psychological impact, but you'd have to be an idiot to say, "so is getting a traffic ticket."

Which isn't to say putting a child up for adoption is as bad as a brutal assault, but it is to say that ignoring obvious differences of degree is... let's say not the same as being clever._________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

Yeah, it's awfully fucking easy to judge people you don't know and have never met on the basis of one statistic and go, "Ah ha! You're living a sinful life!" It's the height of privilege to stand around, sharing none of the risk, and disparaging people for making the best of what's available to them as they see it. Really classy.

I think the brilliance about this quote is that it's so true that it creates a bit of sort of cathartic euphoria in the moment before you recognize how often a rebuttal like this is immediately relevant, which causes you to try to punch the pain out of your face

Its just crazy! Gibson has always been a totally innocuous poster -- I remember his av and him posting in threads, but its like he's had this bizzaro conservative commentator in his brain just waiting to burst out.

He's like the Manchurian candidate of dickery, one second the conversation is about robots as a metaphor and or/not a metaphor, with Rothide working himself into a RothidClassik(TM) lather, and there's a spark in Gibson's head and his eyes suddenly glaze over and YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE SUCKS GUYS? WOMEN HAVING AGENCY OVER THEIR OWN BODIES BZZZZZZ KILL THE PRESIDENT OF MALAYSIA BZZZZZZ YOU KNOW YOU CAN GET ABORTIONS FROM VENDING MACHINES NOW JUST WHEN ITS CONVENIENT FOR YOU, YOU BABY FILLED HARLOTS BZZZZZ_________________Once, at a local NOW meeting where I was the only male among about a dozen women, a feminism trivia contest was held. I came in third.

I was pointing out that fighting for the freedoms of a robot are hypocritical, because I assume the majority of people here are pro-choice. You are arguing the point that a creature should be preserved because you believe it to be cognizant, yet promote abortion because you believe it is creature incapable of thought, feeling, or emotion. I think some even feel it is to the point where they consider it along the same terms as property.

I'll answer your first question if the conversation heads in that direction.

No. They are not. Because she was not a fetus. She was already her own thinking being and did not require a massive investment of time and resources from a host.

And the first question is actually the biggest one, which coincidentally you can't answer.

But you go ahead and keep up your phony moralizing.

I can answer, but it is subject to opinion like the fact that you feel the robot has sentience and therefore is not property.

I feel that the fetus is alive, that it can think, and that it can feel. And even then, in extreme cases, I feel destroying any potential life at all is a waste. That is why I preferred not to go to this point, because you feel that a fetus is a property. And I do not mean that as an attack. I am saying that to make you see what you are a saying in a different light. It is something that the woman has complete and utmost reign over. It is something for you to do with as you please.

It is not your body. It is the baby's body. Yes, it feeds upon you, but no more than a robot would wait to receive a command to act.

I am pointing out that this is hypocritical, because if you are fighting for the rights of a robot yet say that a fetus has none, those views are contradictory. Just as you say that the baby has no say in the matter is no more different than saying the the robot has no say in the matter because it belongs to you.

Now, I don't know if you think I am attacking you or not. I don't think you are an idiot, I don't think people who believe in abortions are idiots. In fact, I imagine that you have very good reasons for believing what you do. However, I do think that pro-choice people can be misguided at times, and I think they don't realize hypocrisies when they are right in front of them sometimes because they hold too strongly to their opinion. But, evade it as you might, it is a perfectly parallel analogy.

Are you okay with abortions before Week 5 of pregnancy? Before then the brain hasn't even begun to develop, so the fetus cannot possibly think or feel.
The fetus doesn't even begin to develop the nerves required for sensations such as pain until 20 weeks (and can't actually feel pain until closer to 24 weeks).
In my opinion, as long as a fetus does not have the ability to think or feel, legally it should be treated no differently then a person's finger. Yeah one's fingers are alive, but someone cutting off their own finger, while stupid, is hardly the same thing as committing murder.
Coincidentally, 23-24 weeks is also about the point at which most fetuses are viable, meaning they could live outside the womb.
I belive the point at which the fetus can both feel pain and possibly live outside it's mother's womb is when it truly begins to have an identity appart from it's mother. That is when the morality of abortion becomes questionable. (There must always be allowances for late term abortions if the life of the mother is at stake, of course. No point in two deaths instead of one.)
I know that others think abortions should be allowed for any reason, even in the second and third trimesters, and I respect their opinion on the matter. While I could become pregnant, I never have been pregnant, and I'm certainly not going to pretend I know the circumstances and beliefs of every woman who finds herself in such a situation._________________Deviant Art | Twitter | Tumblr

After about 23-24 weeks, any abortions that occur are most likely going to involve either a non-viable fetus or risk to the mother. Plus, the woman has had a LOT of time to think about/bond with the fetus by then. Late-term abortion is something no pregnant woman takes lightly. It remains none of our business.

As for me, I can't respect anyone that thinks their morality extends to someone else's body. I just tell them if they don't like abortions, don't have one. Simple as that.

thanks for posting that, LadyS - i was going to ask him for his data on when fetuses can actually think and feel, because he can believe whatever he likes, including that the souls of unborn children appear to us as fairies - but that doesn't make it true.

and to throw in my personal rant - anyone opposed to abortion who isn't fighting for comprehensive age-appropriate sex education and ready access to all forms of contraception (for both men and women) is an absolute hypocrite.

if you really want to reduce the number of abortions, you have to teach people what does and does not lead to pregnancy, and then give them the tools to get the outcome they want. "just say no" programs have demonstrably failed to do either._________________aka: neverscared!

i find it interesting how whenever people start saying that abortion is the business of anyone other than the person getting the abortion, it's because there's these hordes of evil terrible awful women who "think it's just birth control" and apparently don't take it seriously enough

i find it especially interesting when i hear that from people who claim to be pro-choice, because it represents a very major concession to the people who actually push the anti-choice agenda, and to the sexuality-policing sentiments that underlie their position.

After about 23-24 weeks, any abortions that occur are most likely going to involve either a non-viable fetus or risk to the mother. Plus, the woman has had a LOT of time to think about/bond with the fetus by then. Late-term abortion is something no pregnant woman takes lightly. It remains none of our business.

Exactly why I'm not all that bothered by the idea of making abortion fully legal. The sort of abortion I would find morally objectionable doesn't happen.

I also object to the idea of people using psychic powers to manipulate other's thoughts... but until that's actually a thing that happens, we don't need any laws on the books about it. That would just be stupid._________________Deviant Art | Twitter | Tumblr

and to throw in my personal rant - anyone opposed to abortion who isn't fighting for comprehensive age-appropriate sex education and ready access to all forms of contraception (for both men and women) is an absolute hypocrite.

if you really want to reduce the number of abortions, you have to teach people what does and does not lead to pregnancy, and then give them the tools to get the outcome they want. "just say no" programs have demonstrably failed to do either.

Very much this as well. I'm 100% pro abstinence until marriage, if you feel comfortable abstaining, but I also happen to be gray-asexual. I'm not dumb enough to think that just because abstinance is perfect for me, obviously it's perfect for everyone else too. Kids need to be taught to respect their peer's wishes on the matter of abstinance (no bullying) AND how to protect themselves if both they and their would-be partner feel ready to go ahead with it._________________Deviant Art | Twitter | Tumblr

well, and not just kids. i know a number of married couples who either a) want kids, but not right now, and not by the bushel or b) have decided that they really don't want kids. telling them just not to have sex is .... not real useful.

i heard a woman in a public meeting say something like "sex is not like drugs. we don't ever want them to use drugs, but we do want them to have sex." sexual health (of which birth control is a part) is a life skill._________________aka: neverscared!